Anyone feel like the S65 has ruined them?

[seekinganswers]

Don't mean to hi-jack the thread but just have one more question. Do most of you normally rev the engine most chance you have while street driving and still receive about 15mpg or does that number drastically go down with a heavy foot?

[Goat Rodeo]

The near-instantaneous response of the engine, in both the E46 M3 and E9X M3 is the thing I miss the most when I drove other cars. Especially in the E9X, the way the engine "barks" loudly and surges forward with a tap on the throttle around 4K in any gear is just incredible.

I have a 335i as a daily and in comparison it has to stop in think for a half a second before doing anything. So boring.

I'm sure if I had the 335i only and never had M3s I would think it was very responsive.

[Goat Rodeo]

Originally Posted by EvenSteven

You need a heavy foot and high revs to properly drive this car. All the torque complainers are people who fail to grasp this simple fact.

Never understood this. M3 has such a nice amount of low end torque. Going from my 6spd M3 to 6spd 335 I often find myself nearly stalling out in 2nd gear in the 335, M3 has such easy power down low -- though this is the exact opposite of the way is presented in the forums.

Granted I have not driven a C63 to compare, but can't get one in 6spd, so not on my list.

[Goat Rodeo]

Originally Posted by seekinganswers

My friend lent me his S2000 for a couple weeks when I came back home for vacation. I had always read a lot of good things about the car and I was excited that I would have some time with it. Honestly, I was very unimpressed with the car and its power delivery. I only say this because I am not really a fan of revving an engine to redline to extract every ounce of power, so that left me kind of weary of high-revving engine

S2000 has an amazing "internet forum reputation" but I think it is an underpowered piece of shit. Dog slow even when revved, no power, big yawn. Your story is very common: read all the hype, then go drive it. Walk away like, WTF??

M3 is in a different world in terms of power, even if both follow the same concept of being high-revving. They are worlds apart in actual practice. M3 you can easily roll around town lazily shifting at 4K RPM and feel like you are expending no effort yet still go quite fast.

[kwike92]

i feel the same way.. i was an hour away from selling my m3 but when it came time, i could not let it go, so I'm keeping it. the S65 is truly a remarkable engine in its design, performance and engineering.

M till i die! lol jk. but yes, i feel the same way.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by seekinganswers

Don't mean to hi-jack the thread but just have one more question. Do most of you normally rev the engine most chance you have while street driving and still receive about 15mpg or does that number drastically go down with a heavy foot?

i drive pretty aggressively. hit 8300 RPM almost every time i get into my car. (not in the winter though). but with that said. i get 16 MPG. i know you can get around 20 in this car if drive it right.

although if fuel economy is a big concern. stay away from the e92.

[V8FunNaturally]

Is it my car or I find a lot of comments on this thread are a big understatement of what happens if you even just think of revving the S65, you will be above speed limits before you know. Speaking for my car, I don't even need to go above 4krpm I am already accelerating much faster than 99% of vehicles that are trying hard.
If I take it above 4krpm it will looks like serious drag racing (which i never do), if I even try to approach redline I better be focused and alert because the way it picks up speed is phenomenal.
And that was in normal mode. If I turn all sport mode, I call it "flying saucer" mode because last time I tried it on the highway it felt like time slowed down for other cars while the M3 effortlessly provided power so responsive it feels telepathic. I don't believe power mode is just a throttle remap the ECU is also changing other engine parameters unleashing the full power of that engine. You get extremely nervous accelerations. It is a huge difference with or without that mode. Now here comes the shocking part. I don't know if it is just my car but as I took a 3 hours drive on back road with sport mode my mileage average over the trip was 24 mpg. And that was no relaxed drive at all. Then I got into town and it dropped to 21 mpg. If I drive around town with large avenues and frequent red lights I get about 17-18 mpg.

My car has known very minimum city bumper to bumper driving and is not a DD. I can rev match my manual trans shifts. It was broken in on mountain roads and big trips. I don't take it out unless it is for a 3/4 hour drive minimum.

[Sapper_M3]

Originally Posted by Goat Rodeo

Never understood this. M3 has such a nice amount of low end torque. Going from my 6spd M3 to 6spd 335 I often find myself nearly stalling out in 2nd gear in the 335, M3 has such easy power down low -- though this is the exact opposite of the way is presented in the forums.

Granted I have not driven a C63 to compare, but can't get one in 6spd, so not on my list.

It's because the M3 only has 295 lb-ft of torque.

The reality is that 1) the E9X M3 has very short gearing, and 2) the S65B40 provides its peak torque of 295 lb-ft from 3000 RPM to 8000 RPM. While the M3's power output continues to increase the higher it is revved, if we're talking purely torque, it doesn't need to be "wringed out" to get you accelerating quickly. Even as low as 2500 RPM, with the short gearing, you'll be moving. By 3000 RPM, though, you're producing peak torque--and combined with the short gearing, you have a very torquey car.

Who knows though; maybe 3000 RPM is too high for some people to rev?

[EvenSteven]

Originally Posted by sunsweet

I don't believe power mode is just a throttle remap the ECU is also changing other engine parameters unleashing the full power of that engine. You get extremely nervous accelerations. It is a huge difference with or without that mode. .

Yes, all the BMW engineers, performance school instructors, track rats, etc are all stupid and you're so smart. I'm sure you've never even seen a track. Go drive a Pontiac.

[Darkone]

Originally Posted by Sapper_M3

It's because the M3 only has 295 lb-ft of torque.

The reality is that 1) the E9X M3 has very short gearing, and 2) the S65B40 provides its peak torque of 295 lb-ft from 3000 RPM to 8000 RPM. While the M3's power output continues to increase the higher it is revved, if we're talking purely torque, it doesn't need to be "wringed out" to get you accelerating quickly. Even as low as 2500 RPM, with the short gearing, you'll be moving. By 3000 RPM, though, you're producing peak torque--and combined with the short gearing, you have a very torquey car.

Who knows though; maybe 3000 RPM is too high for some people to rev?

Sorry OP not trying to go off topic, please forgive. Help me out guys, me and my friend were thinking about this the other day. Is torque really a benefit past getting the car going off the line? For example, say you were racing a friend to see who could take off a wheel lug nut first. He is bigger and stronger than you, holding other variables constant like breaker bar length, etc. once the initial torque is applied, if your friend is heavier and stronger he will perhaps start the rotation of the bolt a split second sooner. However, his extra strength and weight is then wasted once the bolt starts to turn because at that point its all about the speed of the RPM of that bolt to take it off. So is the gobs of extra torque really that beneficial to cars once the car gets going?

Real world example: I race my friends LS3 Vette he is 100% stock and so am I. Were pretty much dead even all the time. He has Vette with 430 HP at 6600 RPM and 425 lb/ft. Even mag rags have the LS3 vette going quarter in 12.5 seconds and the M3 does approximately the same with 414hp and 295 ft/lb. Based on torque, with our weight being higher and torque much lower than the Vette, we should be destroyed by this car. I can only think a major contributor to equal quarter mile times is the M3s higher RPMs. If we are spinning the engine at 8300 RPM and they are spinning at 6600 rpm- holding other variables constant like gearing etc. Isn't the key at this point RPM and less torque? The higher RPM is essentially spinning the flywheel faster, which spins drive shaft and axels faster and in the end the wheels are spinning faster. Faster rotating wheels equals faster moving car. I know that's an oversimplification but are we thinking this thing out correctly ?

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Darkone

Sorry OP not trying to go off topic, please forgive. Help me out guys, me and my friend were thinking about this the other day. Is torque really a benefit past getting the car going off the line? For example, say you were racing a friend to see who could take off a wheel lug nut first. He is bigger and stronger than you, holding other variables constant like breaker bar length, etc. once the initial torque is applied, if your friend is heavier and stronger he will perhaps start the rotation of the bolt a split second sooner. However, his extra strength and weight is then wasted once the bolt starts to turn because at that point its all about the speed of the RPM of that bolt to take it off. So is the gobs of extra torque really that beneficial to cars once the car gets going?

Real world example: I race my friends LS3 Vette he is 100% stock and so am I. Were pretty much dead even all the time. He has Vette with 430 HP at 6600 RPM and 425 lb/ft. Even mag rags have the LS3 vette going quarter in 12.5 seconds and the M3 does approximately the same with 414hp and 295 ft/lb. Based on torque, with our weight being higher and torque much lower than the Vette, we should be destroyed by this car. I can only think a major contributor to equal quarter mile times is the M3s higher RPMs. If we are spinning the engine at 8300 RPM and they are spinning at 6600 rpm- holding other variables constant like gearing etc. Isn't the key at this point RPM and less torque? The higher RPM is essentially spinning the flywheel faster, which spins drive shaft and axels faster and in the end the wheels are spinning faster. Faster rotating wheels equals faster moving car. I know that's an oversimplification but are we thinking this thing out correctly ?

no need to say your sorry! its fun to talk a cars.

like you were getting at. the M3 has tec on its side. high redline. short gears, better transmission etc. keep the M3 in its power band.

[2 SLOW]

LSX engines ruined me. The S65 is pretty good though.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by 2 SLOW

LSX engines ruined me. The S65 is pretty good though.

wanna hear something funny.

my last car had a LS3 engine. this was my last car, skip to 1.50 to hear what a man LS3 sounded like. hahah

[Sapper_M3]

Originally Posted by Darkone

Sorry OP not trying to go off topic, please forgive. Help me out guys, me and my friend were thinking about this the other day. Is torque really a benefit past getting the car going off the line? For example, say you were racing a friend to see who could take off a wheel lug nut first. He is bigger and stronger than you, holding other variables constant like breaker bar length, etc. once the initial torque is applied, if your friend is heavier and stronger he will perhaps start the rotation of the bolt a split second sooner. However, his extra strength and weight is then wasted once the bolt starts to turn because at that point its all about the speed of the RPM of that bolt to take it off. So is the gobs of extra torque really that beneficial to cars once the car gets going?

Real world example: I race my friends LS3 Vette he is 100% stock and so am I. Were pretty much dead even all the time. He has Vette with 430 HP at 6600 RPM and 425 lb/ft. Even mag rags have the LS3 vette going quarter in 12.5 seconds and the M3 does approximately the same with 414hp and 295 ft/lb. Based on torque, with our weight being higher and torque much lower than the Vette, we should be destroyed by this car. I can only think a major contributor to equal quarter mile times is the M3s higher RPMs. If we are spinning the engine at 8300 RPM and they are spinning at 6600 rpm- holding other variables constant like gearing etc. Isn't the key at this point RPM and less torque? The higher RPM is essentially spinning the flywheel faster, which spins drive shaft and axels faster and in the end the wheels are spinning faster. Faster rotating wheels equals faster moving car. I know that's an oversimplification but are we thinking this thing out correctly ?

Not enough time right now for a full response, but I'll say this:

Torque IS important; don't let anyone tell you different--BUT it isn't important like the magazine bench racers would like you to believe. Torque at the wheels is important, and the "peak torque" figure you hear quoted for cars is at the crank (not factoring in the gearing from the transmission, diff, wheels/tires) and doesn't take into account the car's actual torque curve.

With that said, here's some good food for thought. The new 5.0 Mustang GT (a great performance bargain, by the way) has nearly identical horsepower and weight to the E92 M3 with peak torque higher by 100 lb-ft. The quarter mile trap speeds are nearly identical.

There's a reason why power to weight is an often quoted metric for estimating performance figures. Torque to weight? Not so much.

[Leonardo629]

I'll be willing to get rid of my M3 for another car that also has a V8 engine that revs higher than 8000rpm....

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by Leonardo629

I'll be willing to get rid of my M3 for another car that also has a V8 engine that revs higher than 8000rpm....

Agreed: As long as it is available in a manual, is naturally aspirated, is rear wheel drive, and is very close to 50/50 f/r on weight distribution.
Unfortunately for me, I'm going to have to look beyond what Munich is offering now and in the immediate future to find such a car.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

Agreed: As long as it is available in a manual, is naturally aspirated, is rear wheel drive, and is very close to 50/50 f/r on weight distribution.
Unfortunately for me, I'm going to have to look beyond what Munich is offering now and in the immediate future to find such a car.

manual, n/a, RWD, high revving. not 200k

good luck!

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by Ezio

manual, n/a, RWD, high revving. not 200k

good luck!

Indeed, I'll need it. buuuuttttttt there are some that own a 2011 997 GT3 that are trying to sell, and then there's the Z06 & Z07 that are either out there or will soon appear. So there's hope at well under $200k with certain performance increases over the beloved E92M3 albeit not a type for type replacement.

[V8FunNaturally]

Originally Posted by sunsweet :
I don't believe power mode is just a throttle remap the ECU is also changing other engine parameters

Originally Posted by EvenSteven

Yes, all the BMW engineers, performance school instructors, track rats, etc are all stupid and you're so smart. I'm sure you've never even seen a track. Go drive a Pontiac.

Racing instructor, track rats do what they do well which is teaching the art of racing cars or racing themselves. Principal engineers like myself and BMW engineers excel at engineering. You on the other hand are a presumptuous internet keyboarder who IS the name calling you are trying to put in my mouth. The driver is the biggest factor on a track, and arrogant people like you usually are the fools getting beat by lesser cars. I do my racing in Greenville and been taught by Matt Mullins and Mike Renner. You can stop reading here and go tell Pontiac drivers that you belittle them. You're the kind of people that give M owners a bad name.

I said M Power sport mode is not a simple throttle remap because that is a flawed simplification of what actually happens. First of all the relation between available power, thermal efficiency, air fuel ratio is complex and depends on many factors including charge temperature and pressure. Air to fuel ratio (either stochiometric, lean or rich) will change power even without changing the throttle butterfly valves alpha aperture which only changes intake air mass. Only at WOT will you get the same max power in sport mode than in normal mode. At all other gas pedal positions if you are in sport mode, the AFR and even VANOS adjustment positions and Valvetronic can be set more aggressively by the MSS60 on the M3. You will be exploring a different combination of parameters for operating the engine than you ever could in normal mode until you are at WOT where both internal settings converge. One can imagine the engine control parameters in a multi-dimensional space with different trajectories in different power mode but common settings at WOT.

[sensi09]

I'm probably the minority, but I don't think the S65 has ruined me at all. Don't get me wrong, it's a great engine and a great car, but I guess I'm jaded after daily driving it for 70K+ miles.

Just glanced through this thread and it seems like a lot of new owners here. Sad to say, that initial excitement goes away after awhile. Just like the hot girl you get bored with...variety is key. I'm sure even people who daily cars like 430s and gallardos get bored with them after awhile.

As for the next car, a 8000+ rpm is great, but a smaller and lighter package along with something that feels more "raw" is more fun IMO.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by sensi09

I'm probably the minority, but I don't think the S65 has ruined me at all. Don't get me wrong, it's a great engine and a great car, but I guess I'm jaded after daily driving it for 70K+ miles.

Just glanced through this thread and it seems like a lot of new owners here. Sad to say, that initial excitement goes away after awhile. Just like the hot girl you get bored with...variety is key. I'm sure even people who daily cars like 430s and gallardos get bored with them after awhile.

As for the next car, a 8000+ rpm is great, but a smaller and lighter package along with something that feels more "raw" is more fun IMO.

makes sense. i will never put near 70k miles on a car. so when i trade up for something new its around 30k+ miles.

[2 SLOW]

Originally Posted by Ezio

wanna hear something funny.

my last car had a LS3 engine. this was my last car, skip to 1.50 to hear what a man LS3 sounded like. hahah

Been there, done that, made some people annoyed

Car sounded good though...